Detection and Prediction of Faults in
Photovoltaic Arrays: A Review
Kais AbdulMawjood1,2, Shady S. Refaat2, Walid G. Morsi1
1
University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT), Oshawa, ON, Canada
2
Texas A&M University at Qatar, Doha, Qatar
kais.abdulmawjood@uoit.net, shady.khalil@qatar.tamu.edu, WalidMorsi.Ibrahim@uoit.ca
Abstract—The solar industry has rapidly grown over the past
several years and photovoltaic (PV) systems in particular have
significantly expanded. Detection and prediction of various faults
in the PV system is a key factor to increase the efficiency,
reliability, and lifetime of the PV system. The PV system element
that is subject to hard working condition is the PV panels, which
leads to many possible faults affecting the operation and life time
of the system if not identified or predicted in timely manner. In
previous studies, several techniques of fault detection were
presented. These detection methods depend on sensing different
faults at different locations of the PV system. Some solutions
identify the faults on the DC side, while others detect faults on the
AC side of the system. This paper provides a comprehensive
review of common faults within the context of the DC side of the
PV system (PV panel), addressing the faults type, causes, their
effects on the PV performance, and possible detection and
prediction. In this paper, the faults will be divided into groups
based on their time characteristics as permanent, intermittent or
temporary, and based on the incipient faults. The study of the
incipient faults is ess7ential to identify the faults at initial stages
that may result in preventing permanent faults. This review paper
includes a detailed overview of major PV panels fault detection
approaches and classifies them according to their detection and
prediction methods. The paper introduces the most effective
techniques for faults detection in PV arrays.
Keywords—Photovoltaic Arrays, PV Faults, Fault Detection
techniques
I. INTRODUCTION
Over the past decade, a rapid growth of photovoltaic (PV)
technologies and systems have been experienced over the world
[1]. The PV is considered as the most promising and major
renewable energy source due to providing a clean energy at
various power levels and in various sites including domestic,
due to a vast and unfailing energy, and constantly replenished
energy supply [2]. It offers significant improvement to the
energy security, national income, public health, and protecting
the environment. Solar power has become the world's most
attractive and in some cases the cheapest form of new electricity
generations [3].
PV operation can be affected by different factors such as
maximum power point tracking error, environmental effects like
shading and dust or snow accumulation on the PV surface,
wiring losses and ageing, and malfunction in other PV
components like power conditioner unit, and the inverter. A
monitoring study [4] in 2010 showed that faults have a potential
effect on reducing the power generated by a PV system annually
by about 18.9%. Therefore, it was essential to develop proper
techniques that continuously analyze current, voltage, and
output power characteristics of PV system and detect existing
and developing faults. Having a detecting algorithm that quickly
detects a fault presence in the PV system and identifies the cause
behind that fault is essential in maximizing the operational
performance and reliability of the overall system. In recent
years, different detection techniques have been considered in the
literatures to detect and identify various faults for PV systems
[16]–[46]. This suggests that there is no comprehensive fault
detection technique capable of detecting all of the defects in a
PV system [5].
The contribution in this paper is to discuss the various faults
and detection techniques in PV system within the context of the
PV arrays. The effect of faults on the operation of PV arrays will
be discussed. Comparison of different recent techniques used in
the detection and diagnosis of PV arrays’ faults will be
discussed. In addition, the strengths and limitations of the
existing detection and diagnosis methods will be analyzed,
while the challenges of such detection techniques will be
discussed.
The paper is organized as the next: section 2 provides a brief
overview of PV array subcomponents to understand the
behavior of PV array under different types of faults. Section 3
presents various faults in PV arrays while the faults sources will
be addressed. Different techniques of faults detection in PV
arrays are presented in Section 4. Challenges related to defects
in PV arrays and detection methods are addressed in section 5.
Finally, section 6 includes a summary and conclusion of this
work.
II. PHOTOVOLTAIC ARRAY AND POWER GENERATION
Photovoltaic systems can be sorted according to their power
levels or based on system configuration or the connection to
utility grid. A typical PV system comprises four parts: the PV
array, power conditioner, storage system, and PV inverter. Then
the system is connected to the utility grid with or without local
load. Fig. 1 illustrates a basic PV system integrated with utility
grid and local load [6].
Solar cells are combined in series to construct PV modules,
converting solar energy to electric power. PV modules can be
combined in series and/or in parallel to assemble a PV array
matching the electric power demand. Fig. 2 shows the main
components of the PV system.
 The non-linear V-I and P-V characteristics of a PV module
are shown in Fig. 3. The curves show the three important points:
short-circuit current (Isc), open-circuit voltage (Voc) and
maximum power point (MPP). The MPPT enhances the system
to operate at the maximum possible values of the power, which
the module can provide. Both the V-I and P-V curves are based
on the electrical performance of solar cell. Fig. 4 shows the
common equivalent model of solar cell. The one-diode
equivalent circuit consists of a current source to inject
photocurrent Iph, a single diode to represent the diffusion
phenomenon by Id, and a shunt resistance Rsh to limit the
current Ish caused by manufacturing defect of solar cell
structure. The heat generated in the solar cell reduces the cell
efficiency and is presented by the series resistance Rs. The
light reflection increase as well as water penetration inside the
module. In addition, bubbles are result of blowing small areas
where adherence is lacking. Another reason for reducing the
cell performance is the defect in the anti-reflective coating. The
radiation with time may cause a color change of the anti-
reflective coating which lowers the amount of light reaching the
cell and hence reduce the cell performance. All the mentioned
reasons may occur early due to humidity and high temperature
in addition to the aging of the PV module [9].
Utility Grid
Power
Blocking
Diode Conditioner Inverter

current IL delivered by the solar cell can accordingly be Battery

Charge/
DC

expressed as follows [7]: Discharge AC

AC Load

1 (1) PV Array
Battery
Bank

where , K = 1.38 × 10-23 J/K, q = 1.6 × 10-19 C, Fig. 1: Block diagram of basic PV
and n is the quality factor of the diode ,it’s value should be Photovoltaic
between 1 and 2. Blocking Diodes
Output Circuit

III. FAULTS IN PHOTOVOLTAIC ARRAYS

Solar
This section presents the most popular faults in photovoltaic Cells

arrays. A fault is recognized when there is an output power

Module
reduction of the PV array than the supposed to be. It may be due
String
to fault in a PV module or string of PV modules like shading,
Array
soiling effect and snow covering, degradation and corrosion, and
by-pass or shunted diode failure. It can be also due to electrical
connections, short circuit, or wiring losses. Fig. 2: Photovoltaic System Components
In general, faults in PV arrays can be grouped according to P I
their time characteristic as permanent, incipient, and
intermittent. The intermittent faults refer to faults with Pmax

temporary effect such as shading, leaf, bird drop, and ISC

environmental stress like dust, contamination, snow Imp MPP

accumulation, and high humidity. Permanent faults include PV

module(s) damages such as short circuit, open-circuit, junction
box faults, and interconnection damage. While incipient faults
occur due to cells degradation, corrosion, and partial damage in
interconnections. Incipient faults may lead to permanent faults. V
Fig. 5 shows most common types of faults in PV arrays. Vmp Voc

Fig. 3: I-V Curve of a PV module

A. Degradation in PV Array:
Degradation may produce power output loss up to 50% [8]. A Rs
study in [7] has shown that the cell degradation occurs due to
IL +
different reasons. The first reason is the regression of adhesive
material between glass and cells. The material color change Id
from white to yellow and sometimes then to brown results in Ish VLoad
decreasing the light reaching the solar cells and hence reducing
Iph Rsh
the generated power. The second reason is called delamination,
which results in having gaps between different subsequent _
layers of the PV module where the adherence is lost. The
delamination cases reduction in the generated power due to the Fig. 4: Equivalent circuit for one-diode model
 Fault shading conditions. The heat in solar cells accumulate to high
levels with disconnected bypass diodes, and that may cause
hotspots which lead to browning, burn marks, and fire in worst
Permanent Intermittent Incipient cases. The V-I and P-V characteristics of a PV module are
disturbed during the shading and when bypass diodes are
disconnected, and the open-circuit voltage and maximum power
Line-to-line Shading Degradation of the array drop significantly.
Line-to-ground Leaf Corrosion
Bridging Bird drop Interconnection F. Open-Circuit Fault:
Open-circuit Dust partial-damage
Bypass diode Contamination This type of fault occurs when a disconnection problems
Grounding Snow appear in a PV string or more. Most of the disconnection
Arc accumulation
Junction box High humidity
problems are due to poor soldering in strings interconnections.
Interconnection Short circuit current and maximum power are decreased due to
damage the open-circuit fault, while open voltage stays close to its
normal value [14].
Fig. 5: Classification of faults in PV array
G. Earth or Grounding Faults:
B. Soiling and Shading Faults: A ground fault happens due to unexpected short-circuited
Soiling fault results from accumulating snow, dust, dirt or path involving one or more currying current conductors and the
any other particles on the front surface of PV module. While ground, which would cause a huge increase in the current
hard shading fault occurs when PV panels are shaded by nearby passing through the affected conductors causing mismatched
objects or buildings. Both faults reduce the output voltage which currents and changes of the PV array configuration. The
affects the power generating output of the PV arrays. Soiling or consequences of ground fault are subsequent fault currents,
solid shading may cause reduction from 10% to 70% in power disturb or drop output voltage, and suddenly changes in the V-I
generation [10]. characteristics of the PV array [15]. Ground faults are
considered the most common faults in the PV system. A
C. Partial Shading Fault: breakdown or failure of cable insulation due to manufacturing
Another fault is the partial shading which reduces output defects or overheating and aged cables may cause such faults.
power due to covering part of the PV array [11]. Partial shading Ground fault may result in a number of hazards such as electric
might occur due to passing clouds, smoke, dust or other shocks and fire hazards.
temporary affects. An experimental research [12] has shown that H. Arc Fault:
shading conditions trigger the bypass diodes which effects the
output current and results in presenting a high frequency noisy Arc fault is a result of any intermittent connections including
I-V curve, and hence reduces the power output. It has been soldered joints. Also, insulation breakdown of current carrying
concluded that shaded cells act as a resistance and resulting into conductors causes arcs between adjacent conductors which
hot spots. produce high frequency noise in the output current or voltage of
string or multiple strings, and that would also cause sudden
D. Line-to-Line Fault: output voltage and current drops. It should be mentioned that
A line-to-line fault involves high fault current or DC arcs such faults may produce fire in the PV panels.
between two different potential points in the PV array [13]. Such
fault is defined as accidental short-circuit between two different IV. FAULTS DETECTION METHODS
potential points in an array. It can occur among modules that In general, PV fault detection techniques allow identifying
belong to the same string or between two adjacent strings. A the type and location of different failures of PV systems. Such
line-to-line fault in addition can occur between array cables of techniques should be robust to increase the system reliability
different potential, but it doesn’t not involve any grounded and lifetime and provide safe operation. Also, the techniques
points. In some situations, the line-to-line fault is called a should be fast in detecting evolving faults to avoid consequences
bridging fault when it occurs between two modules of same and further failures. The techniques are grouped to six main
order from two different strings. The fault causes a reduction in categories: visual methods, imaging solutions, electrical
open-circuit voltage, but short-circuit current may stay the same. methods, machine learning techniques, electric protection
The voltage reduction will result in changing the V-I devices, and ARC fault detectors. Those methods are describes
characteristics of the PV array. below.
E. Bypass Diode Fault: A. Visual Method:
The bypass diodes are integrated in parallel with a certain Visual inspections are usually conducted regularly to detect
number of solar cells in the PV module. These bypass diodes defects in fielded photovoltaic modules. They are the first step
prevent reverse bias heating phenomena of solar cells during to determine mechanical or electrical deficiencies and to decide
on conducting further tests. The National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL/IEA) with the support of the US Department
of Energy developed a checklist for visual inspection of fielded
PV modules [16]. According to IEC-61215 standards, the visual
inspection conducted should be accomplished at 1000 lux and
from different angles to avoid reflections. Several defect types
may be observed using this method such as; discoloration,
bubbles, delamination, burning marks, browning, cracked glass
or cells, dirt points, lose or exposed to damage wiring,
interconnections rust or corrosion, snail tails, and damaged or
breakage pieces. The major drawback in the visual inspection of
PV cells is that it depends on human capabilities. This
responsibility could be sometimes boring and not reliable, as it
may take longtime to detect failure.
B. Imaging Solutions
B.1. Thermal Methods:
Infrared (IR) or thermal imaging is an effective and
systematic diagnostic of solar cells defects. IR camera is used to
scan the PV array while it is operating. The camera measures the
temperature differences in cells and modules resulting from
defect faults such as (a) interconnection failures or module
wiring, (b) hot spots due to internal short circuits, defected
bypass diodes, change in the value of series resistance, cell
mismatch, and snail trails, and (c) cell cracks. Thermal method
is more suitable for large PV plants inspection. Detection and
classification for cell-level faults using thermal imaging are
described in [17] and [18]. In both studies, the IR images were
recorded using IR camera to perform future image processing in
order to identify the type and location of faults. In [17],
temperature variance and mean value for each cell are
calculated, while cells are classified according to their
temperature mean value toward detecting faulty cells. While the
other studies used thermal gradient analysis to detect defected
cells [18]. A method to recognize PV modules edges with
thermal images by detecting sharp temperature differences
between metal frame and the nearby solar cells has been
proposed [18]. Indeed, positioning of IR camera, distance from
PV array, and ensuring an overlapping between consecutive
pictures are challenges affecting proper classification and
detection of faults using this technique.
B.2. Ultrasonic inspection:
This technique is mainly used for identifying cracks, voids,
and de-bonded lamination structures before PV modules
production. It also identifies unbounded cells in a module as
well as degradation cracks after PV modules are fielded. The
technique is classified to two inspection methods: the
transmission method and pulse-echo method, see Fig. 6. In both
methods the moving ultrasonic transducer is used to scan PV
modules combined with x-y indicator [19]. In the transmission
method, attenuation of the ultrasonic signal passing through a
tested sample is measured, and the x-y location information of
defects are recorded. This method locates the defects and their
size. While in the second method, the pulse-echo method which
is most popular, the ultrasonic pulses reflected back from defects
are measured which provides z-axis value in addition to the
information of defect size and x-y location. This method
identifies the causes of module degradation and provides
technical data that help manufacturers improving the reliability
of their products.
B.3. Electroluminescence Imaging
Electroluminescence imaging (EL imaging) technique is
used to test PV modules defections like fine cracks, broken gate,
and identify solar cells with different conversion efficiency
which occur due to an increase in cell series resistance and/or
reduction in cell parallel resistance. In this method ramped
voltage is injected to the module and product
electroluminescence that reveals non-uniformities and defects.
At certain level of voltages, the glow becomes visible and reveal
defects and cracks that reduce the efficiency of the cell. The cost
of this detection technique is high and can conduct only offline.
Fig. 7 shows the analysis steps for Electroluminescence
investigation [20]. In the failure detection stage, cells with red
frames represent broken cells or include cracks, while cells with
yellow frame are inactive cells.
B.4. Lock in Thermography (LIT)
Lock in thermography is a testing solution to check power
loss in solar cells. The technique is different than the infrared
method. It is based on excitation device with lock in capability
bundled with a power supply to inject pulse current with
different modulation into PV module. The injected current
results in increasing the temperature of the cells with defected
shunts. The method includes also a thermography camera to
detect cells with defected shunts. By changing the modulation
of the injected current, different types of shunt defects are
detected. This test allows detecting small defects [21], and it is
usually conducted offline and under illumination or in dark
conditions.
C. Electrical Detection Methods
C.1. Climatic Data Independent (CDI)
This method includes detection techniques that do not
involve climate effects such as solar irradiance, temperature,
humidity and wind speed. Two most popular techniques for fault
location in PV module are discussed in this section. The first
technique is the time domain reflector (TDR), and the other is
the earth capacitor measurement (ECM). In both techniques
different devices such as LCR meter (to measure PV circuit
parameters: inductor, capacitor, and resistor) and function
generator are used. In [22] it was presented experimental work
using time domain reflectometry. In TDR method, the
waveform changes then the delay between the injected signal
and reflected signal are used to detect the existing degradation
such as the series resistance increase between modules and the
positions in the PV string. The TDR should be used periodically
to inspect and find array degradation. Another experimental
study [23] used earth capacitance measurement (ECM) to
estimate the disconnection position in the PV string without the
effect of irradiance change. The method should be used at the
 Ultrasound Of PV Concentrator Cell Assembly
Measure Transmitted
Solar Cell
Pulse Attenuation
Solder Transducer
Ceramic
Solder
Aluminum or Copper
Pulse-Echo Measure Reflected
Transmission
Method Echo
Method
Fig. 6: Ultrasonic transmission and echo-pulse methods.
Fig. 7: PV module under electroluminescence test.
completion of the PV system inspection. In ECM method, the
position of disconnected module (n) in string of M modules can
be estimated by:
n C /C M (2)
where, CD represents normal string capacitance while CX
represents capacitance of defected string.
The supervision technique in [24] proposed a statistical
approach based on analysis of variance (ANOVA). The tested
approach provides detailed information about the behavior of
constitutive parts of PV system and allows fault detection or
miss-operation identification.
C.2. Electrical current–voltage (I-V) measurement technique
In general, the target in electrical I-V measurements method
is the PV string. The reason is that usually the PV array has
several strings connected in parallel at the junction box which
allows measuring the strings outputs individually. Accordingly,
string output voltage and current can be measured and tested at
the junction box to identify in advance possible defects like
disconnection or degradation because such defects reduce string
output power or disturb the string I-V curve [25]. However, that
fault position cannot be identified in the string using traditional
techniques like I-V measurement or Voc measurement [23]. A
simple automatic fault detection technique was proposed by
comparing the measured I-V characteristics of the string with
the characteristics of the string under different fault cases. In
[26], the / characteristic was calculated from the
I-V characteristics, and partial shadow phenomenon was
detected by the peak appearance of the calculated
characteristics. Also, the PV system performance was estimated
using values of shunt and series resistances (Rsh and Rs), and
fill factor (FF) that were determined from the I-V characteristics
[27]. The fill factor (FF) is defined by the following formula:
(3)
.
C.3. Power loss analysis (PLA) technique
In this technique, power losses of the PV system are
analyzed for fault detection and classification. The PV system
parameters calculated from monitoring data along with climate
information data are used to simulate the PV system behavior in
real time. The monitored data in real work conditions of system
DC side are compared with the simulated results to detect
system power losses and classify faults. An automatic
supervision and fault detection method based on power losses
analysis technique was implemented. The work, in addition,
proposed two indicators to identify the variation of the DC
variables with respect to their simulated values. These indicators
are the current and voltage ratios as given in the following
expressions:
(4)
(5)
The detection method was successfully tested experimentally to
detect different faults like, faulty module or string, partial
shading, ageing and MPPT error [28]. Another fault detection
procedure is based on comparing the simulated and measured
variables in real time data for grid connected PV system, while
the losses of both DC current and voltage are analyzed and
compared with set of error thresholds to identify the error type
[29]. The work in [30] shows a fault detection method analyzing
the inconsistencies measured at the terminals of faulty strings
and corresponding array. The approach algorithm uses the
voltage of healthy module to differentiate unhealthy string and
locate the faulty modules. The approach avoids using current
sensors while embedding voltage sensors in optimal locations.
The method was experimentally tested successfully to prove the
effectiveness of the proposed fault detect method.
C.4. Comparison between measured and modeled PV system
outputs (CMM) technique
In most approaches applying this technique, simulation
models are used to anticipate the power outputs of the PV
systems. The cell model parameters defined in equation (1) are
calculated using real world data and the PV array output is
predicated accordingly. The environmental irradiance and
module temperature conditions are also considered to allow the
simulated model performs as it is in real time [28]. The predicted
outputs of modeled PV system and the measured outputs of the
corresponding DC side of the PV system are compared to early
detect different types of system malfunctions [31]. The authors
in [32] used PSIM based element to create the PV model rather
than using conventional mathematical model and proposed an
extend correlation function for faults identification. A recent
study [33], used I-V characteristics as well as module behavior
under real work conditions to develop the main PV module.
D. Machine learning (ML) techniques
The PV panel performance and efficiency change based on
various conditions such as irradiance, temperature, humidity,
wind speed, dust, rain, snow, shading, breakdown of individual
cells, and aging. Consequently, it is hard to define certain
boundaries for fault detection. The machine learning methods
have the ability to automatically learn and modify certain
conditions from particular set of data [34], therefore ML
techniques can be used for self-learning system and overcome
that limitation. Various machine learning methods have been
used for fault detection and classification. Machine learning
algorithms are divided into three types: supervised learning,
unsupervised learning, and reinforcement learning. The
supervised learning models are the most commonly used in
machine learning such as linear and logistic regression, multi-
class classification, and support vector machine [35]. The major
drawbacks in the supervised learning models are: the trained
model does not work properly in different seasons of the year
[36], the amount of data required for training is large, and the
model is built on a case-by-case basis. The unsupervised
machine learning is more used in the complex system that is
required to handle a complex patterns or processes reference
data training, the algorithms learn to inherent structure from the
input data. There are many drawbacks in the unsupervised
learning models such as clustering problem, and association
problem. The reinforcement learning is used to train agents to
complete tasks such as robots. The reinforcement learning
problems include complex training, optimal weight initialization
learned.
E. Protection Device Based Technique
Usually PV systems are equipped with devices that instantly
break electric circuit to stop ongoing faults. For example,
ground fault is a pathway between a current carrying conductor
TABLE 1: IMAGING TECHNIQUES COMPARISON
Imaging Technology
Thermal IR Camera
Ultrasonic Ultrasonic transducer
Electroluminescence Near Infrared (NFIR) cameras
Thermography Thermographic camera sensing infrared radiation
TABLE 2: COMPARISON BETWEEN MACHINE LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES
Learning Types Data Processing Tasks Distinction Nom
Supervised Learning Classification/Regression Computational Classifiers
/Estimation Statistical Classification
Unsupervised Learning Clustering/Prediction Connectionist Classifiers
Parametric
Nonparametric
Reinforcement Learning Decision Making Model-Free
Model-Based
and the ground. A ground fault detection and interrupt (GFDI)
device is used to protect the PV array during grounding faults
[37]. The National Electrical Code (NEC) 690.5 and 690.35
specify the requirements of ground-fault protection for PV
arrays during grounding fault events [38]. The line-to-line (L-L)
and line-to-ground (L-G) faults are another fault that may
happen in PV systems. A residual current device (RCD) can be
installed to protect PV strings or the entire PV array [39]. This
device can detect the difference in current passing through string
terminals or array output terminals, and isolate the string or the
array from the system in case of L-L or L-G faults happened.
The IEC 60755 standard defines different RCD types and their
proper sense and trip. It is recommended to set the sensitivity of
a RCD slightly higher than PV module leakage current [40].
F. ARC Fault Detector (AFD) Techniques
The arc-fault detector or arc-fault circuit interrupter (AFCI) on
PV system was required by NEC 690.11, and multiple
manufacturers started developing new arc-fault detection
solutions. The AFCI has two components: arc fault detectors
(AFD) and interrupt devices (ID). The location of the two
components, AFD and ID, were discussed and verified
experimentally in [41]. Most techniques utilize the AC noise to
determine arc flashing on PV DC side. In [42], the authors
investigate frequencies that appear on voltage and current in the
DC side of PV systems that can be used for arc fault detection.
The generated signals during partial shadow and irradiance level
are with frequencies below 1000 Hz and therefore in order to
avoid false tripping it is recommended to ignore such low
frequencies. In addition, frequencies above 100 kHz have low
energy and include various effects from nearby antennas and RF
phenomena, and therefore cannot be used also for arc fault
detection. Besides, the switching frequencies of most inverters,
DC/DC converters and power conditioners are in the range 10
kHz to 50 kHz. The testing study [43] at Sandia National
Laboratory (SNL) shows that the best frequency band to detect
the noise of arc faults is 1-100 kHz, and it is not advised to select
a single frequency for fault detection [41].
Mode Faults Size
Normal operation interconnection failures, hot spot, and cracks PV plants
After fielded cracks, voids, lamination PV module
Offline Fine cracks, broken gates, change in cell resistance PV module
Open circuit Shunt defect Solar cell
Learning Algorithms
Support Vector Machine
Hidden Maron Model / Bayesian Network
Neural Networks
K-Means / Gaussian Mixture Model
Dirichlet Process Mixture / X-Means
Q-Learning / R-Learning
TD Learning / Sarsa Learning
 The authors in [44] proposed a solution for arc fault protection
by combining a switching element with the arc detector and
embedded them in the PV module. The arc detector uses some
algorithms on the output of digital finite impulse response (FIR)
filters to analyze measured signal, and generates a signal that
represents the chaos in the input signal. This level can be
compared with a threshold to detect arc fault existence. Another
technique in [45] has been proposed for arc fault prediction and
detection using spread spectrum time domain reflectometry
(SSTDR) method. The SSTDR meter injects a spread spectrum
signal modulated at high frequency and the observed reflected
signal is correlated with a copy of the injected signal to detect
fault present in the system.
V. CHALLENGES
Challenges persist around the faults detection in PV system
due to nonlinear output characteristics of the system. Avoiding
destructive consequences is essential and a challenge for timely
warning the PV plant operators on the faulty parts to take a
corrective action before a complete failure occurs. PV system
normal operation can be affected by the presence of faults that
reduce power output and cause potential damage to the array.
One of the major challenges that should be taken is increasing
the reliability of the grid when integrated with intermittent
renewable energy resources such as solar photovoltaic (PV)
system.
Analyzing faults is a key challenge in building integrated
photovoltaic system into the utility grid. Therefore, analysis of
current, voltage, and output power characteristics for describing
the effect of the faults that occur is very important. Today, we
still do not have a reliable methodology for detection and
diagnosis of incipient faults in the PV system. There is no
current-based fault detection technique presently employed in
solar photovoltaic industry. The potential challenges are the
nonlinear - characteristics of the PV system, current-limiting
nature of PV arrays, fault discrimination, high fault impedances,
transient behavior of the PV system, inverters faults, mismatch
faults, limitations of existing monitoring and fault detection and
diagnosis approaches in solar PV system.
As the overall costs of installing and owning grid-connected
PV systems (GCPVS) are declining, residential, commercial and
utility scale adoption of this technology is on the rise. Although
there are many benefits of GCPVS, such as its long working
lifetime (25–30 years), low operations and maintenance costs,
and obvious environmental advantages over fossil-fuel power
plants, however, GCPVS have their own set of challenges.
VI. CONCLUSION
This paper discusses various faults occurring in photovoltaic
arrays and their detection methods. Three types of faults were
considered according to their time characteristics: permanent,
incipient and intermittent.
The paper discussed different fault detection methods. The
imaging methods use different types of camera sensors to
identify a degradation or failure in the PV module.
Electroluminescence technique is used to detect defects in the
manufactured modules. Ultrasonic technique is used to find
defects in fielded modules, and thermal technique is used to
identify degradation in fielded exposed module. For electrical
detection methods, both offline and online based techniques are
discussed. The earth capacitance measurements (ECM), and
time-domain reflectometry (TDR) are two popular offline
techniques. The first technique, ECM, is used to find
disconnections in the PV module, while the second technique,
TDR, is used for detecting the impedance change in addition to
identifying disconnections in the PV string. Various online
detection techniques explored in the literature are also presented
in this paper. The power loss analysis (PLA) and comparison
between measured and modeled PV system’s output (CMM)
methods continuously monitor the output power to detect
defected modules or strings. An overview of line-to-line and
line-to-ground faults was given and different protection devices
that respond in case of faults were presented. The arc fault
detection methods in addition were investigated.
Finally, this review gives the limitation and discussing
suitable techniques for more effective fault detection and
diagnosis of PV arrays. Additionally, the challenges facing the
PV arrays fault detection and diagnosis are discussed along with
possible solutions that can be used to address such challenges.
This paper will help the researchers and practicing engineering
to understand the faults occurring in PV arrays and the use
effective fault detection techniques to deal with them.
REFERENCES
[1] Arani, S. M., Hejazi, M.A., 2016, “The Comprehensive Study of Electrical
Faults”, in PV Arrays. J. Electr. Comput. Eng. 2016.
[2] Madeti, S.R., Singh, S.N., 2017a, “Monitoring system for photovoltaic
plants: A review”, in Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 67, pp. 1180–1207.
[3] Triki-Lahiania, A., Abdelghania A.B., Slama-Belkhodjaa, I., 2018, “Fault
detection and monitoring systems for photovoltaic installations: A
review”, in Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 67, 2680–2692.
[4] Firth, S. K., Lomas, K. J., Rees, S. J., 2010, “A simple model of PV system
performance and its use in fault detection”, Sol. Energy 84 (4), pp. 624–
635.
[5] M. K. Alam, F. H. Khan, J. Johnson, and J. Flicker, 2013, “PV faults:
Overview, modeling, prevention and detection techniques”, in IEEE 14th
Workshop on Control and Modeling for Power Electronics (COMPEL),
pp. 1–7.
[6] Singh, G. K., 2013, “Solar power generation by PV (photovoltaic)
technology: A review”, in Energy 53, 1-13.
[7] Masmoudi F., Salem, F. B., Derbel, N., 2016, “Single and double diode
models for conventional mono-crystalline solar cell with extraction of
internal parameters”, in IEEE 13th International Multi-Conference on
Systems, Signals & Devices (SSD), pp. 720-728.
[8] Bastidas-Rodriguez J. D., Petrone G., Ramos-Paja C. A., Spagnuolo G.,
2013, “Photovoltaic modules diagnostic: An overview”, in IECON 2013
- 39th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, pp.
96-101.
[9] Walker, G., 2001, “Evaluating MPPT converter topologies using a matlab
PV model”, in Journal of Electrical and Electronics Eng., 21(1), 49.
[10] Maghami, M. R., Hizam, H., Gomesa, G., Radzia, M. A., Rezadad, M. I.,
Hajighorbani, S., 2016, “Power loss due to soiling on solar panel: A
review”, in Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 59, pp. 1307-1316.
[11] Stettler, S., Toggweiler, P., Wiemken, E., Heydenreich, W., Keizer, A.,
Sark, W., Feige, S., Schneider, M., Heilscher, G., Lorenz, E., et al, 2005,
“Failure detection routine for grid-connected PV systems as part of the
pvsat-2 project”, in Proceedings of the 20th European Photovoltaic Solar
Energy Conference & Exhibition, pp. 2490–2493.
[12] Alsayid, B. A., Alsadi, S. Y., Jallad, J. S., Dradi, M. H., 2013, “Partial
shading of PV system simulation with experimental results”, Smart Grid
& Renew. Energy, 4(6), pp. 429–435.
[13] Zhao, Y., Palma, J., Mosesian, J., Lyons, R., Lehman, B., “Line–Line Fault
Analysis and Protection Challenges in Solar Photovoltaic Arrays”, in
IEEE Trans. on Industrial Electronics, Vol. 60(9), pp. 3784- 3795.
[14] Gokmen, N., Karatepe, E., Celik, B., Silvestre, S., 2012, “Simple
diagnostic approach for determining of faulted PV modules in string
based PV arrays”, Solar Energy, 86(11), pp. 3364-3377.
[15] Zhao, Y., Lyons, Jr. R., 2011, “Ground Fault Analysis and Protection in
PV Arrays”, PVPN1: Ground-Fault Analysis and Protection in PV
Arrays, Tech Topics: Photovoltaic Protection Note 1, Issue 1.
[16] Packard C. E., Wohlgemuth1, J. H., Kurtz, S. R., 2012, “Development of
a Visual Inspection Checklist for Evaluation of Fielded PV Module
Condition”, in PV Module Reliability Workshop, NREL, 2012.
[17] Vergura, S., Marino, F., Carpentieri, M., 2015, “Processing infrared image
of PV modules for defects classification,” in IEEE Proceedings of the
International Conference on Renewable Energy Research and
Applications (ICRERA ’15), pp. 1337–1341.
[18] Guerriero, P., Cuozzo, G., Daliento, S., 2016, “Health diagnostics of PV
panels by means of single cell analysis of thermographic images”, in
Proceedings of the IEEE 16th International Conference on Environment
and Electrical Engineering (EEEIC ’16).
[19] Hund, T.D., King, D.L., 1995, “Analysis techniques used on field
degraded photovoltaic modules”, in NASA STI/Recon Technical Report
N, p. 96.
[20] Koch, S., Weber, T., Sobottka, C., Fladung, A., Clemens, P., Berghold, J.,
2016,”Outdoor electroluminescence imaging of crystalline photovoltaic
modules: comparative study between manual ground-level inspections
and drone-based aerial surveys”, in 32nd European Photovoltaic Solar
Energy Conference and Exhibition, pp. 1736-1740.
[21] Breitenstein, O., Bauer, J., Trupke, T., Bardos, R.A., 2008, “On the
detection of shunts in silicon solar cells by photo-and
electroluminescence imaging”, in Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl., 16 (4),
pp. 325–330.
[22] Takashima, T., Yamaguchi, J., Otani, K., Kato, K., Ishida, M., 2006,
2“Experimental studies of failure detection methods in PV module
strings”, in Photovoltaic Energy Conversion, Conference Record of the
IEEE 4th World Conference, vol. 2, pp. 2227–2230.
[23] Takashima, T., Yamaguchi, J., Otani, K., Oozeki, T., Kato, K., Ishida, M.,
2009, “Experimental studies of fault location”, in PV module strings. Sol.
Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 93 (6), pp. 1079–1082.
[24] Vergura S, Accaciani G, Amoruso V, Patrono G, Vacca F., 2009,
“Descriptive and inferential statistics for supervising and monitoring the
operation of PV plants”, in IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 56, pp. 4456–63.
[25] Lin, P., Lin, Y., Chen, Z., Wu, L., Chen, L., Cheng, S., 2017, “A density
peak-based clustering approach for fault diagnosis of photovoltaic arrays”
Int. J. Photo Energy.
[26] Miwa, M., Yamanaka, S., Kawamura, H., Ohno, H., 2006, “Diagnosis of
a power output lowering of PV array with a (−dI/dV)-V characteristic”,
in Photovoltaic Energy Conversion, Conference Record of the IEEE 4th
World Conference, vol. 2, pp. 442–2445.
[27] Kaplanis, S., Kaplani, E., 2011, “Energy performance and degradation
over 20 years performance of BP c-Si PV modules”, in Simulation
Modelling Practice and Theory, 19(4), pp. 1201-1211.
[28] Chouder, A., Silvestre, S., 2010, “Automatic supervision and fault
detection of PV systems based on power losses analysis”, in Energy
Convers. Manage. 51 (10), pp. 1929–1937.
[29] Silvestre S, Chouder A, Karatepe E., 2013, “Automatic fault detection in
grid connected PV systems”, in Sol Energy, 94, pp. 119–27.
[30] Madeti, S.R., Singh, S.N., 2017, “Online fault detection and the economic
analysis of grid-connected photovoltaic systems”, in Energy Vol. 134, pp.
121-135.
[31] Drews, A., De Keizer, A.C., Beyer, H.G., Lorenz, E., Betcke, J., Van Sark,
W.G., Heydenreich, W., Wiemken, E., Stettler, S., Toggweiler, P.,
Bofinger, S., 2007, “Monitoring and remote failure detection of grid-
connected PV systems based on satellite observations”, in Sol. Energy 81
(4), pp. 548–564.
[32] Chao, K.H., Ho, S.H., Wang, M.H., 2008, “Modeling and fault diagnosis
of a photovoltaic system”, Electr. Power Syst. Res. 78 (1), pp. 97–105.
[33] Chouder, A., Silvestre, S., 2009, “Analysis Model of Mismatch Power
Losses in PV Systems”, in J. Sol. Energy Eng 131(2), 024504.
[34] Daliento, S., Chouder, A., Guerriero, P., Pavan, A.M., Mellit, A., Moeini,
R., Tricoli, P., 2017, “Monitoring, Diagnosis, and Power Forecasting for
Photovoltaic Fields: A Review”, in International Journal of Photoenergy,
Vol. 2017, 1356851
[35] Baharin KA, Abd Rahman H, Has-san MY, Gan CK., 2014, “Hourly
irradiance forecasting in malaysia using support vector machine, in
Energy Conversion (CENCON), IEEE Conference on, pp. 185–90.
[36] Youssef, A., El-Telbany, M., Zekryb, A., 2017, “The role of artificial
intelligence in photo-voltaic systems design and control: A review”, in
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 78, pp. 72-79.
[37] Hern´andez, J. C., Pedro G. Vidal, 2009, “Guidelines for protection against
electric shock in PV generators”, in IEEE Tran. Energy Conversion,
24(1).
[38] Flicker, J.D., Johnson, J., 2013, “Photovoltaic ground fault and blind spot
electrical simulations”, in Sandia Report, SAND2013-3459.
[39] Ball, G., Brooks, B., Johnson, J., Flicker, J., Rosenthal, A., Wiles, J.,
Sherwood, L., Albers, M., Zgonena, T., 2013, “Inverter ground-fault
detection ‘blind spot’ and mitigation methods”, Solar Amer., Board
Codes Stand. Rep. (June).
[40] Hernández, J.C., Vidal, P.G., Medina, A., 2010. Characterization of the
insulation and leakage currents of PV generators: Relevance for human
safety, in Renewable Energy 35 (3), pp. 593–601.
[41] Johnson, J., Kang, J., 2012, “Arc-fault detector algorithm evaluation
method utilizing prerecorded arcing signatures”, in 38th IEEE
Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), pp. 1378–1382.
[42] Johnson, J., Kuszmaul, S., Bower, W., Schoenwald, D., 2011, “Using PV
module and line frequency response data to create robust arc fault
detectors”, in Proceedings of the 26th European Photovoltaic Solar
Energy Conference and Exhibition, pp. 05–09.
[43] Johnson, J., Pahl, B., Luebke, C., Pier, T., Miller, T., Strauch, J.,
Kuszmaul, S., Bower, W., 2011, “Photovoltaic DC arc fault detector
testing at Sandia National Laboratories”, in Photovoltaic Specialists
Conference (PVSC), 2011 37th IEEE, pp. 003614–003619.
[44] Schimpf, F., Norum, L.E., 2009, “Recognition of electric arcing in the DC-
wiring of photovoltaic systems”, in Telecommunications Energy
(INTELEC) International IEEE Conference, pp. 1–6.
[45] Alam, M.K., Khan, F.H., Johnson, J., Flicker, J., 2014, “PV arc-fault
detection using spread spectrum time domain reflectometry (SSTDR)”, in
Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), IEEE conference,
pp. 3294–3300.
[46] Strobl C., Meckler P., 2010, “Arc Faults in Photovoltaic Systems”, in
Proceedings of the 56th IEEE Holm Conference on Electrical Contacts
(HOLM), 11639108.